Fidiobia hofferi Kozlov 1978

Fidiobia hofferi Kozlov, 1978

(Figures 7A, 8K, 10D, 11F, 12G)

Fidiobia hofferi Kozlov, 1978: 656; Koponen and Huggert, 1982: 53; Vlug, 1995: 24; Buhl, 1999: 18.

Diagnosis

OOL 1–2 (1.5 ± 0.37, n = 20) times length of diameter of posterior ocellus; antenna nine-segmented; pronotum hardly visible in dorsal view; mesoscutum in anterolateral part with imbricate sculpture, as that of head; between notauli mesoscutum smooth, shining; notauli incomplete, abbreviate anteriorly, gradually dilated posteriorly; T2 smooth, shining, glabrous, without visible sculpture, with two large depressions anterolaterally; length of T2 0.66–0.85 (0.76 ± 0.04, n = 20) times width.

Description

Female: body size: 0.5–0.6 (0.55 ± 0.01, n = 20) mm. Colour: body brown; apex of second metasomal tergite with dark tint. Antenna: A1 and A7–A9 light brown; A2–A6 yellow; vein of forewings brown. Legs including coxae yellow; femora and tibia with light brown tint.

Head transverse, width 2–2.5 (2.2 ± 0.1, n = 20) times length, 1.4 times height, 1–1.25 (1 ± 0.05, n = 20) times width of mesosoma. Vertex and occiput with very faint, barely perceptible imbricate sculpture. Temple sculptured as the vertex. Compound eyes large, glabrous. Width of eye 1.3–2.5 (1.95 ± 0.35, n = 20) times width of temple. Eye height 1.2–1.5 (1.4 ± 0.13, n = 20) times width of eye. POL 1.5–2 (1.8 ± 0.2, n = 20) times LOL. Frons without frontal depression, sculptured as the vertex and temple. Gena without malar sulcus and not striate, with similar sculpture as the temple.

Palpal formula unknown, but probably 1: 1.

Antenna of female nine-segmented: Length of A1 3.4 times width, 2.7 times length of A2. Length of A2 1.7 times width and 3.3 times length of A3. Width of A3 1.3 times length and almost equal to width of A4. A3, A4, A5 and A6 of equal length. Width of A5 1.6 times length and 1.3 times width of A3. Width of A6 2.3 times length and 1.4 times width of A5. A7 as wide as A8, length of A7 1.3 times length of A8. Width of A7 1.5 times length. Width of A8 2 times length and 1.2 times width of A9. Length of A9 1.5 times length of A8.

Mesosoma: length 0.85–1 (0.9 ± 0.02, n = 20) times width. Width 1.6 times height. Pronotum small. Mesoscutum in anterolateral part with imbricate sculpture, as that of the head, 2–2.6 (2.4 ± 0.2, n = 20) times as long as scutellum. Between notauli mesoscutum is smooth, shining. Notauli incomplete, abbreviated anteriorly, gradually dilated posteriorly. Width of scutellum 2.5–3 (2.9 ± 0.1, n = 20) times length, flattened, without lateral keels, smooth and shining.

Length of forewing 2.2–2.7 (2.4 ± 0.1, n = 20) times width, five times length of submarginal vein, 1.2 times length of hindwing, 2.1–3 (2.5 ± 0.1) times width of mesosoma, surpassing posterior apex of metasoma.

Hindwing without veins, with two hamuli. Length of hindwing 4.5 times width. Width of hindwing 2.5 times length of marginal fringe at its longest.

Metascutellum weakly defined, hardly visible in dorsal view. Propodeum medially with two short parallel keels, covered with short, sparse, silvery pilosity.

Pronotal groove shallow, glabrous; epicnemium absent. Side of pronotum sculptured as mesoscutum, glabrous. Mesopleuron smooth, without mesopleural depression and without ridge below tegula. Sternaulus small.

Metapleuron with scattered, short silvery setae in the posterior part. Medially with a depression.

Metasoma: length 1.25–1.5 (1.37 ± 0.06, n = 20) times length of mesosoma, 1–1.4 (1.25 ± 0.07, n = 20) times width; composed of six externally visible terga. Some of the last four tergites may be telescoped under large T2.

T1 convex, with distinct medial prominence and anterolaterally with two large depressions; T1 width 2.5–3.3 (3.2 ± 0.2, n = 20) times length. Ratio between maximum and minimum width of T1 1.8–2.5 (2 ± 0.1, n = 20).

T2 smooth, shiny, glabrous, without visible sculpture, with two large depressions anterolaterally; length of T2 2.5–4 (3.5 ± 0.3, n = 20) times length of T1 and 0.66–0.85 (0.76 ± 0.04, n = 20) times its own width. Ratio between maximum and minimum width of T2 1.3–1.5 (1.4 ± 0.05, n = 20).

Hosts

Reared from an ichneumonid parasitoid of Exoteleia dodecella (Linnaeus) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) (Lemarie 1958).

Distribution

Palaearctic: Czech Republic (Kozlov 1978); Finland, Sweden (Koponen and Huggert 1982).

Material examined

Czech Republic: lectotype female of F. hofferi, here designated, with the following four labels: Moravia m., Bzenec,. Lemarie lgt; 1.VII.1958, ex larva ichneumonid; Fidiobia hofferi Kozlov, 1978, det. Popovici O. 2009 and a red label Lectotype. The other 117 specimens are clearly conspecific with the lectotype and are paralectotypes of F. hofferi (by present designation). They all have the same labels as the lectotype. The lectotype and paralectotypes are preserved in NMPC. Two paralectotypes are now in OPPC. Another syntype is in MNHN (Dr Lubomir Masner, personal communication) and Notton, 2010.

Remarks

The first mentions of F. hofferi appear in Lemarie (1958, 1959, 1960, 1961) and Kozlov (1970, 1971), but in these papers only the name of this species appears, attributed by Lemarie and Kozlov to Masner. Because no description exists in the abovementioned papers, the name F. hofferi Lemarie (1958, 1959, 1960, 1961) and F. hofferi Kozlov (1970; 1971) are nomina nuda. This was the supposed status of this species in the catalogue by Vlug (1995).

The name F. hofferi was made available in a review of the Proctotrupoidea from the European part of USSR by Kozlov (1978) and accredited again to Masner. However, in that publication there is no indication that Masner was responsible for meeting the criteria for making the name available and therefore in compliance with Article 50.1 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (1999) the name is here attributed to Kozlov. No reference was made to the primary type by Kozlov, but according to Articles 72.4.1 and 72.4.1.1 of ICZN (1999) all material mentioned by Lemarie (1958, 1959, 1960) is syntypic. Therefore a lectotype is selected above to preserve the stability of nomenclature.